In this article, I assess three contemporary criticisms levelled at Kant’s theory of evil in order to evaluate whether his theory can be saved. Critics argue that Kant does not adequately distinguish between evil and mundane wrongdoing, making his use of the term ‘evil’ emotional hyperbole; by defining evil as the subordination of the moral law to self-love his analysis is seemingly overly simplistic and empirically false; and by focusing solely on the moral character of the perpetrator of evil, Kant’s theory apparently ignores the most salient aspect of evil – the suffering of victims. While I will not claim that Kant provides us with a fully adequate theory of evil, I respond to each of these criticisms and conclude that Kant’s theory can still provide significant insight into both the nature of evil and the moral psychology of perpetrators of evil.

中文翻译：

---

康德的激进恶论能否得救？

在本文中，我评估了针对康德邪恶理论的三个当代批评，以评估他的理论是否可以挽救。批评者认为，康德没有充分区分邪恶和世俗的不法行为，使他使用“邪恶”一词在情感上夸张；通过将邪恶定义为道德法则从属于自爱，他的分析似乎过于简单化并且在经验上是错误的；康德的理论只关注作恶者的道德品质，显然忽视了恶最突出的方面——受害者的痛苦。虽然我不会声称康德为我们提供了一个充分充分的邪恶理论，